In Re Proceeding To Enforce Judgment Against National Partitions, Inc.
Syllabus
American Plastics Technologies, Inc. (APT) and RAO Design, International, Inc. (RDI) (collectively the Plaintiffs) brought this action in the trial court seeking to enroll an Illinois judgment against National Partitions (NP). The judgment had been awarded by the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. NP filed an answer questioning the jurisdiction of the Illinois court. NP coupled its answer with a counterclaim asserting that the Plaintiffs had been guilty of the initial breach of the contract. Following a hearing, the trial court decreed registration of the Illinois judgment and ultimately dismissed NP's counterclaim. NP appeals. We affirm
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that a forensic “preview” takes one to three hours; the full examination “could take months”
- finding agents had the good faith belief that searches of defendant’s electronic devices only required reasonable suspicion and agents did have reasonable suspicion that the devices would “reveal evidence of criminal activity involving minors” (emphasis added)
- “[N]o circuit court, before or after Riley, has required more than reasonable suspicion for a border search of cell phones or electronically-stored data.”
- “Although . . . there may be innocent explanations for some of the facts on which the officers relied, reasonable suspicion need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct.” (quotation omitted)
- we may review arguments related to preserved claims, and a challenge below is sufficient to preserve an argument even if it is a new twist based upon additional authority on appeal
- “Although . . . there may be innocent explanations for some of the facts on which the officers relied, reasonable suspicion need not rule out the possibility of innocent conduct.” (quotation omitted)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.